gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: erikwilson7 on July 29, 2019, 04:25:02 AM
-
Osmo Vänskä and the Minnesota Orchestra have the next installment in their Mahler cycle being released on 2 August, 2019.
https://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-Major-Minnesota-Orchestra/dp/B07T14ZJL9
A brief sample of the second movement can be heard here: https://www.hbdirect.com/album/4108710-mahler-symphony-no-1-osmo-vaumlnskauml-minnesota-orchestra.html#tab_works_details
The second movement can also be purchased for download on iTunes and each movement can be sampled for 90 seconds.
Timings
I. 16:06
II. 7:25
III. 11:23
IV. 20:57
56:45
A few observations: the offstage trumpets sound great at the beginning of the first movement. It sounds like Vänskä is following Mahler's instruction to have the trumpets be distanced in different places, one a bit closer and the rest further away. Pretty cool.
This is very divisive: The basses all play in unison at the start of the third movement, just like in Alsop's recording. It seems this is becoming the norm these days, and I can't decide where I stand on this. The tuba solo sounds excellently lugubrious and present.
The beginning of the finale sounds very controlled in Vänskä's hands, just like most of his other Mahler recordings. Take that as you will; it could be good or bad, but I find that both Stürmisch movements (in M1 and M5) work better when the conductor isn't afraid to just let go of the reins a bit. Either way it seems that Vänskä's approach is to never let one orchestral detail slip through the cracks, and you have to admire that about his releases so far.
All in all, I'm really looking forward to this.
-
In the inner two movements, I like the scherzo to be slower (yet rhythmically emphatic) and the slow movement to be quicker. I think the 'Frere Jacques in minor' opening should be played quicker than usual (but still soft).
-
Barry, what are some of the best examples of what you described?
-
Bernstein/Concertgebouw. Also Jurowski/L.P.O. and Neemi Jarvi/SNSO (Chandos), but those two have "Blumine" in the second movement position. My favorite is the recent Adam Fischer/Dusseldorf one - its inner movement timings are 7:43 and 10:04. He also gets the finale in at just less than 20 minutes.
Two more 'obscure' examples are Wakasugi/Dresden Staatskapelle and Kletzki/Vienna Phil. (but that one has a cut in the finale).
-
The audio sample of II. sounds very good. I always look for 'Grand in scale, minute in details' approach in Mahler. That's why I like Vanska's Mahler.
-
After the 1st, Vanska's next Mahler release might be 4th or 10th (Complete). The will come 3rd.
-
John, I'm also the same way about what I like in Mahler recordings. It's why I like the Chailly cycle so much. And this current Vänskä one, even if his conducting is unusual in parts.
And I believe you're right, with the 7th coming sometime sooner or later as well.
Erik
-
I don't understand Vanska in Mahler. I think when the set is completed it will be one of the weirdest Mahler sets ever. I've just finished listening to the 1st... Is this Mahler?
-
The only Vanska Mahler I've liked so far (but it is far from perfect) is the 2nd. Yes, I gave it 5/5 stars because it was note-perfect, it had a fabulous 2nd movement (one of the best) but the choral singing let me down. I think if I were a newbie and listened to his Mahler 5 or 6th for the first time, I'd be completely put-off and would have stayed away from this composer. Where is the frenetic energy needed? The passion? Instead of that we have super-clinical instrumental playing and too much tempering with the dynamics.
-
Konsgaard,
I generally agree with what you're saying, but I think it's important to keep in mind a few things when approaching something weird like Vänskä's Mahler set. With so many good sets out there already today, the only real value in recording and releasing Mahler's music is if the conductor and/or orchestra has something new or different to offer. I think Ádám Fischer's current set is case in point: an unknown orchestra when it comes to Mahler's music, with a conductor no one would have thought to conduct Mahler excellently? What a unique concept! Who would've thought Düsseldorf could tackle Mahler?
Anyway, I digress. My point there is that Vänskä does have something to offer. It may not be the way we're used to hearing the music, but at least it's somewhat of a fresh approach. The sound quality is, I think, pretty much unprecedented too. As for the frenetic energy? The passion? Now I think the issue with that is that those concepts are somewhat subjective. Is frenetic energy dictated by tempo or instrumental timbre? Is passion related to tempo? Or vibrato? Or dynamics? All of the above? The reason I ask this is because I for one find just as much passion in Vänskä's Adagietto as I do in HvK's, or even Gielen's. Just my opinion though, and everyone sees it differently. I know many on here would disagree.
I think what we need to appreciate about Vänskä's Mahler set here is what it is intending to offer us: note-perfect performances and incredible sound quality. For passion we already have Bernstein, Chailly, I. Fischer, Levine, Tennstedt, heck even some Boulez.
What we have here is different Mahler, but isn't that what we need?
Erik
-
I have a completely different approach. For me a new recording should not necessarily have something new to offer. I collect Beethoven sets obsessively. Yes, I get excited with a new approach but not when it sounds anaemic or lifeless (ie. Adam Fischer's Beethoven set on Naxos). Back to Mahler: I prefer to listen to a well-played, no-nonsense performance even when it has nothing new to say provided that it is committed and expresses emotion, instead of listening to micromanagement and manipulations just for the sake of sounding different. Yes, I've heard some things afresh with Vanska. But what's the point? Do I get enjoyment out of it, as when I listen to Bertini, Bernstein or Chailly? I don't. His points were interesting, I heard some parts differently, but that's about it. For me music (and art in general) is more than making a point. It needs to have a spiritual aim and quite frankly, I don't get this in Vanska. When I listen to to his recordings I don't feel transformed in any way.
Again, let me say that I like a different approach when it has an overall, cohesive purpose (rather than making a pedantic point). I like Zinman's Mahler for the clarity. I like Currentzis's vision of a life-affirming transformation (instead of death) in the finale of the 6th (what a 6th!) Even Nagano's 8th with its sensual textures seems to work (though not my favourite).
PS. Regarding Vanska's Adagietto from the 5th, I am sorry to say this is one of the most vulgar, uninvolving renditions I've heard. Not saying I like schmaltz, on the contrary I like it fast and clear, but this just doesn't sound right to my ears. The first and second movement are OK, albeit devoid of feeling. But his Adagietto is something that ruins the whole performance for me.
-
I think it's valuable that many of us have these different approaches to what we appreciate about a performance. Not even just of Mahler's music, but in general. It goes to show how many different angles music and art can be approached from, and that it means something different to everyone. Vänskä's Mahler is by no means my favorite; I prefer the likes of Chailly, Stenz, Bertini, Bernstein, Blomstedt, among others. However, what I do appreciate about Vänskä's Mahler is akin to walking around in an exhibit of sketches that were traced flawlessly: "well, you certainly drew it as correctly as possible. Looks just like it should! Good job, Mr. Vänskä." Vänskä's M6 is a "perfect tracing," whereas Bernstein's DG M6 is an entire painting: slightly flawed but fully human. But again, it just depends on what you're in the mood for.
And I definitely agree with you when you say that Vänskä does not offer a transformative experience; I would turn to at least 10 other conductors before him for that kind of listening.
I like what you said about different approaches with an overall cohesive purpose. It's funny, given our generally different approaches to listening to recordings I couldn't agree more with the examples you gave.
Also PS. I want to clarify that Vänskä's Adagietto is not entirely my cup of tea either; I was just saying that I do personally find passion in it. My type of approach to that movement is more along the lines of Chailly, Abbado/Lucerne, Shipway (even though it's slow), Gielen, the Fischers, and Harding. I figured I ought to say this before I get ripped to shreds on this board.
-
I love the Vanska M2 and the inner two movements of M6. I like much of what I heard in M5.
-
As for "Currentzis's vision of a life-affirming transformation" in M6 suggested by Kornsgaard, what do you make of the report of Mahler in tears after conducting the 6th?
-
I admit that there is a touch of aloofness in Vanska's M1st.
-
Still, I quite like Vanska's M1st as I do his M2, M5-6.
-
I just don't feel the need to search for another M1, because I'm quite satisfied with the Adam Fischer/Dusseldorf one. On dvd, I'm partial to the Fabio Luisi/Dresden Staatskapelle one. I also like both recordings with Ozawa/Boston (DG and Philips). I also like the Jurowski/L.P.O. one as well. We're spoiled for choices.
-
Yes, I agree with Barry, I haven't bought an M1 for years as none could match Bernstein's RCO and I'm quite happy with the collection I have. (We're definitely spoiled for choices!)
What a great symphony that I sometimes under rate.
-
I really like the Bernstein RCO recording, but the second movement is just way too slow for my taste. I like when it falls around 8 minutes, doch nicht zu schnell! I do like that he picks up the tempo at the end of the movement though.
I also like the Ádám Fischer one a lot. There are just two very nitpicky things about it for me, and they're both in the finale: in the first lovely B section, the horn lines are oddly forward (sometimes overpowering the string melody) and their intonation isn't great either. It sort of ruins that section for me. Also the coda, while exciting, isn't tight. I like when those trumpet triplet fanfares are tight, like on the Bernstein RCO and Stenz, among others. Heck, and the Vänskä. The Ádám Fischer has maybe the best M1/III I've heard, with a fantastic first and second movement too.
I think my personal favorite recording of M1 lately has been the Nott/Bamberg, actually. First movement goes fine, second is well-played and well-paced, the third is not too slow and the klezmer stuff is stylized well, and the finale moves along and is played very well. The coda is super exciting.
-
I'm liking some aspects of the Vänskä M1 a lot, and some things are just a bit off to me. Here are some of my observations as a whole:
Pacing/conducting: weird. An average view of the first movement, and quite a fast second. A slowwwww third, and a broad finale too. There isn't any sort of arch here, it seems arbitrary. I think in terms of pacing the second movement works best (though it is quite fast). The third movement is just paced very strangely to me, and I don't think it works. If Vänskä did more with the klezmer episodes I think this movement would have succeeded. I still prefer the solo double bass in the opening. The finale coda is slow and hardly exciting, like Konsgaard mentioned. I really don't feel frenetic energy there, and I think that has to do with the deliberate tempo and static dynamics.
Sound quality: excellent for the most part, as expected. The string textures aren't as tight as the recordings of M5 and M2; the M2/I and M5/III and V have some of the best string clarity I've ever heard recorded in a Mahler symphony. The trumpets and brass in particular don't shine like a European orchestra (or even the SFSO or Pittsburgh), but they sound darkly hued, if that makes sense. I'm not great at describing strings or brass. As I found with the M5 recording, the crash cymbals also sound dark in timbre. I think those qualities fit the Fifth, but not so much the First here, a lighter and brighter symphony—for the first half at least. I don't know if that has anything to do with the cymbals used or the way this one was recorded. The bass end of the spectrum is fantastic. As I said before, the offstage trumpets in the first movement are phenomenally captured.
Performance: top-notch, as usual. I think that's a result of extreme drilling and refinement, however. Possibly editing too. I don't want to discredit the Minnesotans though because they really are excellent players. Essentially every orchestral detail is present.
If anything, the value I find in this recording is that it'd be a good one to follow along to the score with. Maybe not for tempi, but for studying the actual notes. I think that goes for all the Vänskä recordings so far.
-
The trumpets and brass in particular don't shine like a European orchestra (or even the SFSO or Pittsburgh), but they sound darkly hued, if that makes sense.
In the Minnesota Symphony the trumpet section plays Monette trumpets. They produce a very dark hued and diffuse sound. A very different beast than rotary and piston trumpets, for sure. Other than the old Boston section with Charles Schluter, I don't know of any other orchestra that uses these trumpets.